Study of the E3T Training Program, Cohort Eight, Year One ...

StudyoftheE3TTrainingProgram,CohortEight,YearOne

November,2015

CynthiaM.OkoloMichiganStateUniversity

Donotdistributeorcitewithoutauthorpermission

StudyoftheE3TTrainingProgram,CohortEight,YearOneCynthiaM.Okolo

MichiganStateUniversity

ExecutiveSummary

Thisstudyentailedayearlonginvestigationofthefirstyearofatwo-yearprofessionaldevelopment(PD)programtohelpteachersimplementUDL.ThePDprogram,E3T,isofferedbytheMacombIntermediateSchoolDistrictandentailsbothface-to-facePDsessionsandonlinemodules.Keytopicsintheprogramincludeintentionalplanning,diversityintheclassroom,UDLprinciplesappliedtospecificlessonsegments,andtheuseoftechnologytofacilitateUDLimplementation.Teachersareprovidedwithavarietyofexperiencesandmaterials.ThePDitselfemploysprinciplesofUDL,offeringmultiplerepresentationsofinformationandchoiceinwhattovieworreadandhowtoenactconcepts.Thestudytookplaceinthe2014-15schoolyear,duringwhichacohortof26middleschoolscience,socialstudies,andspecialeducationteachersfromtheL’anseCreuseschooldistrictparticipated.Sixoftheseteacherswerethefocusofintensivecasestudies.Theirlessonplansandteachingwereexamined,threelessonswerevideorecordedandanalyzed,andpost-observationinterviewswereconductedtobetterunderstandinstructionalpractices.Studenttimeontaskwasexaminedandstudentsratedtheobservedlessons.Keyfindingsincludedthefollowing.Teachers’beliefsandself-ratedcompetenceaboutUDLprinciplesandpracticesbecamemorerealisticoverthecourseoftheyear.TheirknowledgeofUDL-alignedpracticesimproved.TeachersvaluedtheexplicitlessonplanningactivitiespresentedandpracticedinthePDsession,butquestionedthedegreetowhichdetailedplanningcouldbeemployedineverylesson.TheyexpressedapreferenceforintentionalUDLplanningattheleveloftheunit.ObservationsuggestedthatallcasestudyteachersimplementedatleastsomeoftheUDLpracticestaughtintheE3Tprogram.However,therewasconsiderablevariabilityamongteachersinthedegreetowhichtheyusedUDL-alignedpractices,aswellasagreatdealofstabilitywithinteachers.ThosewhousedmoreUDL-alignedpracticesatthestartofthestudywerethosewhousedmoreattheconclusionofthestudy.Studenttimeontaskvariedwiththedegreetowhichteachersofferedvariedoptionsforthepresentationofinformationanddifferentoptionsforstudentresponses.However,despitethesedifferences,students’ratingsofkeyUDL-alignedoutcomes,suchasenjoymentandinterest,werehighlysimilaracrossbothteachersandlessons.Technology,afeatureofE3TPD,wasusedbyteacherstoimproveassessment,andthispracticemayprovideabridgetofurtheruseoftechnologynextyear.However,technologyresourceswereverylimitedinparticipatingschools.FindingssuggestthatPDcouldbeimprovedbytakingintoaccountindividualteacherprofilesandbuildingonteachers’strengths.Furthermore,thestudypointsoutsomeofthemajorissuesandproblemsindefiningandmeasuringUDLpracticesandimplementation,andindeterminingtheirimpactonstudentoutcomes.

StudyoftheE3TTrainingProgram,CohortEight,YearOne

CynthiaM.OkoloMichiganStateUniversity

Introduction

ThisreportdiscussesapilotstudyoftheMacombIntermediateSchoolDistrict’sE3TProfessionalDevelopment(PD)program.E3TisbasedontheUniversalDesignforLearning(UDL)framework,andendeavorstoteachteachershowtoengageinintentionalplanning,implementUDLprinciplesduringinstructionandusetechnologytoimproveteaching.UDLisaframeworkdesignedtomeettheneedsofalllearnersintheclassroom,andispurportedtoofferparticularbenefitsto“studentsinthemargins.”AlthoughtechnologyisnotanecessarytoolforUDLimplementation,itsuseintheclassroommakesUDLmorefeasible.Thestudywasconductedbytheauthor(Okolo)duringthe2014-2015schoolyear.OkoloconsultedwiththeE3Tteaminthedevelopmentofallinstrumentsandinplansfordatacollection.Sheconductedtheobservations,interviewedteachers,andanalyzedalldata.Interviewsweretranscribedbyanundergraduateeducationmajorunderhersupervision.OtherdatawerecollectedinthecontextoftheE3Ttrainingsessions.Thiswasapilotresearchstudy,designedtoexploretheimpactofE3TPDon:Teachers’beliefsaboutUDL-alignedpracticesTeachers’perceivedcompetencetoaddressUDL-alignedpracticesTeachers’intentionalplanningTeachers’knowledgeofUDL-alignedpracticesandprinciplesTeachers’implementationofUDL-alignedpracticesStudents’timeontaskandratingsoflessonfeaturesTheterm“UDL-aligned”principlesisusedthroughoutthereportbecauseUDLisbestconceptualizedasa“frameworktoimproveandoptimizeteaching”(CAST,www.cast.org).UDLisnotaprescriptiveapproachtoteaching,norapackageofspecificpractices.Manydifferentpracticesareconsistent,oraligned,withUDLprinciples.Italsoisimportanttonotethatthestudyexaminedthefirstofatwo-yearPDprogram,andthus,allresultsmustbeconsideredaspreliminary.Inaddition,giventhetime-consumingtaskofdevelopingdifferentscoringsystemsorapproachestoanalyzethevarietyofproductsproducedduringandbetweenface-to-facePDsessions,dataanalysisofalltheproductsproducedbyteachersisnotyetcomplete.

OverviewoftheE3TPDprogramTheyearduringwhichthisstudywasconductedrepresentstheeighthyearoftheE3Tprogram,andthefirsttimeinwhichacohortofteacherswillparticipateintwoconsecutiveyears.E3TwasinitiallydevelopedbySusanHardin,theAssistiveTechnologyConsultantintheMacombISDandiscontinuallyupdatedtoberesponsivetochangesintechnology,teachingpractices,andtheneedsandcharacteristicsofitsparticipants.Inthe2014-15schoolyear,ateamoffourcontent-areaspecialistsassistedinthedesignanddeliveryoftheE3Tprogramandprovidedsupporttoteachersduringimplementation.ItisimportanttonotethatneitherMs.Hardinnormembersofherteamareabletodevotemorethan25%oftheirtimetoE3Tduetomultiplejobresponsibilities.TheE3TPDprogramentailsbothface-to-facesessionsandonlineinstructionalmodules.Teachersareassignedspecifictaskstocompleteandproductstobringtotheface-to-facesessions.Typically,artifactsfromthesetasksarethefocusofsomeofthediscussionandactivitiesofthesesessions.ThePDitselfemploysprinciplesofUDL,offeringmultiplerepresentationsofinformationandchoiceinwhattovieworreadandhowtoenactconcepts.FromSeptember2014toMay2015therewere4fullday(7hour)face-to-faceE3Tsessionsanda5thhalf-daysession.Thesesessionsweresupplementedbyvoluntaryafterschooloreveningmeetingstolearnspecifictechnologyapplications.EachparticipatingteacherwasgivenaniPadandAppleTV.PrimarytopicsaddressedintheYearOneE3TPDincluded:IntroductiontoUDLLearnerdiversityReadingsupportsLessonOpenersLessonExplanationsBuildingawebpresenceSummativeandformativeassessmentLessonExplorationsExecutivefunctioningIntentionalplanningE3Tsessionsincludedstructuredandopen-endedexplorationoftechnologytoolstosupportUDL-alignedpractices.Othertopics,suchasclassroommanagement,wereintegratedintotheprimarytopics.AkeyelementofUDLisintentionalplanning.DuringE3TPD,teacherslearnedastructuredlessonplanningprocess.Inthisprocess,teachersfirstarticulatethetopicofthelesson,bigideas,essentialquestions,andlearningobjectives.Theythenbrainstormideasaboutmaterials,activities,andmethodsofinstruction,aswellastheclassroomenvironmentorsetupthatwillbemosteffective.Astheydeveloptheirplans,theydesignalessonlaunch(or

opener),exploratoryactivities,waystoeffectivelyexplaincontent,methodsofstudentpractice,andmeansforassessingstudentperformance.AUDLchecklist,withkeyUDLguidelines,isincludedonthelesson-planningtemplate.ThisenablesteacherstoevaluatetheirlessonagainstthechecklistandconsequentlyreviseittoincludemoreUDL-alignedpractices.AnE3TbookmarkandwrittenmaterialsthatexplicateUDLguidelinesandprovideexamplesofhowtheywould“look”whenimplementedarealsoprovidedwiththetemplate.Teachersreviewedmodellessonsandgivenopportunitiestoco-planduringProfessionalLearningCommunity(PLC)sessionsattheirschools,andaskedtoimplementlessonsandotheractivitiesbetweenmeetings.

MethodsParticipantsTwenty-sixteachersparticipatedinthe2014-15E3TPD(withnearlyallreturningin2015-16).Teacherswerespreadacross3middleschoolsintheL’AnseCreuseSchoolDistrict.Teacherswereofferedtwodifferentlevelsofstudyparticipationinthispilotstudy.Level1participationrequirednoadditionalworkofteachersbeyondactivitiesthatwererequiredbytheE3Ttraining.TheresearcheraskedpermissiontoviewtheartifactscreatedduringE3TPDsessions(bothfacetofaceandonline).Eighteenteachers,spreadacrossall3schools,volunteeredtoparticipateinLevel1.TeachersalsowereinvitedtoparticipateinthestudyatLevel2.Level2,orcasestudy,teachersagreedtopermittheresearchertoviewtheirE3Tartifacts,tobeobserved,andtoparticipateininterviewsbasedonthoseobservations.Eleventeachersvolunteeredtobecasestudyteachers,andsixwerechosenbasedonthefollowingsamplingconsiderations.First,theclasstobeobservedhadtobescienceorsocialstudies(someteacherstaughtothercontentorelectives).Second,theclasshadtoincludeatleastonespecialeducationstudent.Beyondtheseconsiderations,theresearchersoughttoobserveclassesinbothscienceandsocialstudies,inbothco-taughtandsolo-taughtclasses,andacrossall3grades.ThesixcasestudyteacherswhoparticipatedintheLevel2studywerespreadacrossthreeschools.Threetaughtsocialstudiesandthreetaughtscience.Ofthesesixclasses,oneclasswasanadaptedsocialstudiesclasstaughtbyaspecialeducator.Twosocialstudiesclassesandonescienceclasswereco-taught(althoughtheinvolvementoftheco-teachervariedconsiderablyamongtheseclasses),andtwoscienceclassesweretaughtbyonlythegeneraleducator(referredtoassolo-taughtclasses).Classsizesvariedconsiderably,from5studentsintheadaptedsocialstudiesclassto35studentsinaco-taughtsocialstudiesclass.Numbersofspecialeducationstudentsperclassvariedfrom1to16,althoughtheclasseswithlowernumbersofidentifiedspecialeducationstudentsalsohadatleast2or3studentsonbehavioralsupportprogramsordeemedbytheirteachertobeatriskforacademicfailure.

Participatingcasestudyteachershadbetween8and30yearsofteachingexperience,andallhadmaster’sdegrees.Fivewerefemales.InstrumentsandDataCollectionInstructionalPracticesSurvey.Atthestartandconclusionofthestudy,allparticipatingteacherscompleteda19-itemsurveythataskedthemtoratetheirbeliefsaboutspecificUDL-alignedpracticesandtheirknowledgeofhowtoimplementthesepractices.ThequestionsfocusedonspecificknowledgeandskillsaddressedduringE3Ttraining.TeachersrespondedwithaLikertscaleonwhich5indicated“stronglyagree”and1indicated“stronglydisagree”BeliefquestionsincludedthefollowingIbelieveitisessentialtoofferstudentschoicesabouthowtheylearnIbelieveitisnotpossibletomotivateallstudentsinadiverseclassroomKnowledgequestionsincludedthefollowing:IknowhowtoeffectivelyengageallstudentsduringinstructionIknowhowtofindorcreateinstructionalmaterialsthatwillbeappropriateforalllearnersCaseStudyLessonObservations.Thesixcasestudyteacherswereobservedonthreeoccasions:November2014,February2015,andMay2015.Thesameclasswasobservedeachtime.OneteacherjoinedthestudyinDecember(aftertheinitialparticipant’sscheduledchanged).Oneteachermissedthefinalobservationduetoillness.Athirdteachermissedthefinalobservationduetomandatedstatetesting.Althoughshe/hewasunabletovideorecordalesson,she/hecreatedalogofherinstructionduringalessonandparticipatedinafollow-upinterviewwiththeresearcherinwhichthatlessonwasdiscussed.Thus,datawerecollectedfrom16lessonsacrossthesixcasestudyteachers.Observationsentailedseveraldatacollectionstrategiesincludingextensivefieldnotesandtimesamplingofstudenttimeontask.ASWIVLRoboticPlatform(http://www.amazon.com/Swivl-Robotic-Platform-for-Video/dp/B00JZM7UGG)wasusedtorecordeachlesson.AniOSdevice,incameramode,wasplacedatoptheSWIVLbaseandtheteacherworearemotethatcontrolledthemotionofthebase—turningthecamerasothatitfacedhimorherass/hemovedabouttheroom.Eachvideorecordingwasuploadedtoasecurecloud-basedserver.Videorecordingswereusedtocheckandverifythedataandfieldnotes.Thevideorecordingsalsowereusedforstimulatedrecallinterviewswiththeteachers(seebelow).Theresearcheralsocollectedalessonplanandanyinstructionalmaterialsusedinthelesson.ObservationaldataweredividedintoActivitySegments.AnactivitysegmentconsistedofaninstructionalactivitythatconformedtothesegmentsoftheE3Tlesson-planningtemplate:lessonopener,exploration,explanation,studentpractice(guidedorindependent),studentassessment,andlessonclosing.

Theobservationaldatawerethenanalyzedfor:1.PresentationofInformation,orthemannerinwhichinstructionalcontentwaspresented;aroughmeasureoftheUDLprincipleRepresentation2.StudentResponseOptions,orthewaysinwhichstudentswereabletorespondtotheinformation;aroughmeasureoftheUDLprincipleActionandExpression3.TeacherActions,orwhattheteacherdidduringthelesson.ThiscategorywasnotadirectanalogofaUDLprinciple,butneverthelessseemedimportanttofullydescribethelesson.Categoriesofinformationpresentation,studentresponseoptions,andteacheractionswerederivedinductivelyfromthedata.Assuch,theyrepresentedthenatureofinstructionthatwasobserved,ratherthanconformingtoapredeterminedlistofUDLpractices,aswouldbethecasewithaUDLLearningWalk(MontgomeryPublicSchools,http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/hiat-tech/udl/udl-walk-through.aspx)orUDLLookFors(CAST,http://community.udlcenter.org/forum/topics/join-the-conversation-about-udl-look-fors-in-practice).StudentTimeOnTask.Amomentarysamplingprocedurewasusedtomeasuretimeontaskduringeachobservationalsession.Inconsultationwiththeteacher,theresearcherchose6studentsatthestartofclass.Threewereidentifiedasspecialeducationstudents.Ifaclasshadfewerthan3specialeducationstudentsinattendance,thenstudentsonbehaviorsupportwerealsotargetedforobservation.Three“average”peerswerethenchosenatrandom.At2-minuteintervals,theresearchermadeavisualsweepoftheclassroomandcheckedwhethereachstudentwason-oroff-task.Ontaskwasoperationalizedaslookingatorengagingwiththeinstructionalmaterials,teacher,orothersinrelationshiptotheinstructionaltask.StudentLessonRatings.Studentsanswered5questionsthatwereconsistentwithUDLpractices.Theratingscalewaskeptasbriefaspossiblesothatitcouldbeadministeredwithin2minutesattheendofclass,thusnotdetractingfrominstructionaltime.Onascaleof1to5(with5indicating“stronglyagree”and1indicating“stronglydisagree”),studentsratedtheirenjoyment,interest,attention,andeffortaswellasthedegreetowhichthelessonwasdifficult.Afinalopen-endedquestionaskedthemtostateonethingthattheylearnedfromthelesson.StudentlessonratingswerenotintroduceduntilLesson2andwereaddedtothestudybasedoninitialpost-observationinterviewswithteachersinwhichtheyexpressedcuriosityaboutstudents’viewsofthelessonsunderobservation.CaseStudyTeacherInterviews.Theresearcherreviewedthevideorecordingstocreate1-2minutevideoclipsfromeachactivitysegment.Withintwoweeksaftereachobservation,thecasestudyteacherparticipatedinaone-hourstimulatedrecallinterview.Avideoclipwasshowntotheteacherands/hewasaskedthefollowingquestions:“tellmewhat’shappeninghere,”“whatUDLprinciplesdidyouuse,”and“howwelldidthoseprincipleswork(ornotwork).”Thisprocesswasrepeateduntilallclipswereviewed.Theteacherwasthenasked

somemoregeneralquestionsabouttheE3Ttraining,includingwhattheyhadlearnedthatwasmostvaluable,whattheywouldliketolearnnext,andwhattheyfoundoflesservalueinthetraining.TheseinterviewswereheldviatheZoomvideoconferencingsystem,recorded,andthentranscribed.

ResultsAmajorconcerninthepresentationofresultsistheprotectionofteacheranonymity.Inastudysuchasthisone,inwhichasmallnumberofcasestudyteachersprovidetheprimarysourcesofdata,personalidentityisatrisk.Inthediscussionbelow,teachers’contentareaisreported,butschools,gender,andthegradelevelofparticipatingclassesarenotprovidedinanefforttoreducethelikelihoodthatanindividualcouldbeassociatedwiththeirdata.Althoughthe“she/he”constructionisaclumsyone,itwasdeemednecessarytohelpmaintaintheconfidentialityofthefindings.Teachers’beliefsaboutUDL-alignedpracticesandperceivedcompetenceinusingUDL-alignedpracticesFigureOnedisplaysresponsestosurveyquestionsaboutteacherbeliefs.Atthestartofthestudy,whenaskedtoratetheirbeliefsaboutpracticesandcontextualfactorsthatcouldsupportthem,themajorityofteachersexpressedhighlypositivebeliefs.Forexample,onthepretest,only4%ofthesamplestronglyagreedoragreedthatstudentswithdisabilitiesshouldspendlesstimeingeneraleducation.Nearlyall(91%)stronglyagreedoragreedthatitispossibletomotivateallstudentsinadiverseclassroom.And78%agreedorstronglyagreedthattheyhadadequatetechnologyintheirclassroom.Ontheposttest,beliefsabouttheadequacyoftrainingtoteachdiverselearners,aswellastheneedtoofferstudentsmorechoice,becomemorepositive.Howeverbeliefsaboutotheritemswerelesspositiveontheposttest,includingthe:(a)sufficiencyofadministrativesupporttoteachchallengingstudents,(b)theappropriatenessofclasssizes,(c)theadequacyoftechnologytheclassroom,and(d)thepossibilityofeveryoneintheclassattainingagradeof“A.”FigureTwodisplaysteachers’ratingsoftheirowncompetencetoimplementUDL-alignedpractices.Theseweremoderatetohighatthestartofthestudy.Forexample,75%ormoreoftheteachersagreedorstronglyagreedthattheycould:(a)managechallengingbehaviors,(b)teachdifficultcontent,and(c)engageallstudents.Self-ratingsofcompetencewererelativelystableoverthecourseofthestudy,withsomeslightdeclinesinitemssuchasbeingabletointerestallstudentsinlearning,keepingtheattentionofallstudents,managingchallengingbehaviors,andteachingpoorreaders.However,teachersshowedincreasedconfidenceintheirabilitiestoimplementotherpractices,includingteachingdifficultcontenteffectively,providinganappropriatelevelofchallenge,andengagingallstudents.

Teachers’IntentionalPlanningAtthestartofthestudy,allteacherswereaskedtosubmitatypicallessonplancreatedforuseintheirclassroom.Outof16plansavailabletotheresearcher,only2showedevidenceofsystematicplanningtomeettheneedsofdiverselearners.Twelveplanswereoneskeptonfileforasubstituteteacherandwerehighlyprocedural.Twoplanswerecopiesofpagesfromateachers’manual.IntheE3Tface-to-facesessions,allteachersparticipatedinactivitiesinwhichtheyproduceddetailedlessonplans(usingtheE3Ttemplate)thatincorporatedmultipleUDLpractices.Theseplans,althoughproducedcollaboratively,suggestedthatteacherswereabletosuccessfullyincorporateUDLelementsintotheirplanning.Lessonplansofthesixcasestudyteacherswereexaminedinmoredetail.Eachteacherwasaskedtoprovidealessonplan,andanyrelevantinstructionalmaterials,atthestartofeachobservation.Itisimportanttonotethatteachersinthisdistrictarenotrequiredtocreateplans,andadministratorsdonotviewlessonplansduringteacherevaluations.Twoteachersdidnotcreatelessonplansforanyoftheirlessons.Theotherfourteachers’plansevolvedoverthecourseofthestudy.Thosewhoseinitialplanswerelessdetailedevolvedintoplansthatweremoredetailedandexplicitabouttheactivitiesinwhichstudentswouldengage.TheplansthatwerethemostelaboratedatthestartofthestudyevolvedintoplansthatmorecloselyconformedtotheUDLplanningtemplate.Becausemostteachersprovidedlessonplansduringanobservation,itwaspossibletoexamineconsistencybetweentheUDLalignedpracticesasplannedandimplemented.Duringtheobservations,therewasnoinstanceinwhichanactivitylistedonthelessonplanwasnotimplemented,atsomelevel,duringinstruction.Duringthefinalinterview,allcasestudyteacherswereaskedaboutlessonplanning.FouragreedthatintentionalplanningwasimportantandthatithadhelpedthemmorefullyconsiderhowtoincorporateUDLalignedpracticesintotheirteaching.TwostatedthattheyvaluedtheE3Tplanningtemplate,butdidnotseeaneedtowriteouttheirplans.AllsixteachersstatedthatintentionalplanningwiththeUDLtemplatewasnotfeasibleforeverylesson,however.Teacherscommentedthatthislevelofplanningwasmostappropriateatthelevelofunitplanning,andbelieveditwouldbemosthelpfuliftheycouldplanwithothercolleagueswhotaughtthesamecontentattheirschools.Collaborativeplanningtimewasscarceandmanyteachersnotedhowithadbeenreducedoverthepastyears,withothermandatoryactivities(e.g.,meetings,committees)cuttingfurtherintoinstructionaltime.Teachers’knowledgeofUDL-alignedpracticesandprinciplesDatarelatedtochangesinknowledgeofUDLwillbedrawnfromthesixcasestudyteachers.Asthereadermayrecall,theresearchercreatedvideoclipsfromeachactivitysegment.Duringeachpost-observationinterview,theteacherwasaskedtoidentifytheUDLpracticess/heusedineachactivitysegment(asportrayedonthevideoclipsshownduringthe

interview).Thepurposeofthisinterviewprocesswastoexaminethedegreetowhichteachers’knowledgeofUDLchanged,asviewedthroughthelensoftheirpractice.Duringthefirstinterview,noneoftheteachersidentifiedanyUDLpracticeswithinthevideosegmentstheyviewed.Whennopracticewasidentified,theinterviewerasked,“whatabout…”andofferedanexampleofapracticealignedwithaUDLprinciplefromthatsegment.Themajorityoftimes,teachersagreedwiththeinterviewerthatapracticewasconsistentwithaUDLguideline.However,twoteachersstatedthatthepracticeidentifiedbytheresearcherwasbetterassociatedwithpracticesfromanotherPDprograminwhichtheyhadparticipatedlastyear.Duringthesecondinterview,allbuttwoteachersshiftedfromidentifyingnonetoatleasttwoUDL-alignedpracticesineachvideosegment.Evenamongthesefourteachers,however,knowledgeofUDLseemedsomewhattenuous.Forexample,oneofthefourteachersadmittedthatshehadthelistofUDLprinciplesandguidelinesonherdesktorefertoduringtheinterview.Duringthethirdinterview,allteachersidentifiedatleastthreeUDLalignedpracticesinthevideoclipstheyviewed.Theseincludedfrequentstudentquestioningduringtheexplanationphaseofalesson(1teacher),hands-onactivities(1teacher),studentchoice(2teachers),exploration(2teachers),collaboration(3teachers),useoftechnology(3teachers),lessonlaunch(4teachers),andformativeassessment(4teachers).EventheteacherwhoidentifiedthefewestUDL-alignedpracticeswasabletodiscussspecificUDLpracticesthatsheorhewouldliketoincorporateintonextyear’slessons.CaseStudyLessonObservationsAsdiscussedabove,15lessonswereobservedandvideorecordedanda16thlessonwaspresentedthroughalogandlessonplan,andthenreviewedwiththeresearcher.LessonsweredividedintoActivitySegments,andthePresentationOptions,StudentResponseOptions,andTeacherActionswithineachlessonwerenoted.Theresultsofthelessonobservationsarepresentedforeachcasestudyteacherbelow.DatathatsupportthisdiscussionaredisplayedingraphicforminFigureThree,andinmoredetailinTableOne.Teacher1.Teacher1’sclasswasaco-taughtscienceclasswith25students,threeofwhomhadidentifieddisabilitiesandfourwhotheteacherconsideredatriskforbehavioralorlearningdisabilities.Mostoftenmonitoringtheworkofoneortwostudentsandhelpingindividualswithdisabilities,theco-teacherwasobservedtocontributetoinstructionononlyoneoccasionwhenthegeneraleducationteacherhadtostepoutoftheroomtohandleabehaviorprobleminthehallway.Across3observations,Teacher1’slessonswerecomprisedofeither3or4activitysegments.Theteachertypicallybeganwithalessonopener;alwaysawrittenactivityinwhichquestions,postedonawhiteboardoronaworksheet,wereansweredindividually,in

writing,bystudents.Aswasthecasewithallotherteachers,duringthelessonopener,theteachertookattendanceandreportedthedatatotheoffice(whichwasaschool-mandatedrequirement).Teacher1alsoengagedinotherproceduralactivitiesduringthelessonopener,whichlastedaslongas15minutesinLesson2.TherewasnolessonopenerinLesson3,whichbeganlateduetothebehavioralissuementionedabove.Themostcommonactivityacrossthethreelessonswasexplanation,occupyingbetween13(Lesson1)and29(Lesson2)minutesofthelessontime.Explanationswerealmostalwayscharacterizedbyteacherlectureinterspersedwithquestioningandfollow-upexplanationsbasedonstudents’responses.Thisteacher’slecturestyleentailedfrequentquestionaskingandanswering,withtheteacherclarifyingmisconceptionsandextendingstudentresponses.Adistinctiveelementofthisteachers’lecturestylewasfrequentexamplesandreferencestoexperiencesandsituationsthatwerefamiliartostudents’lives.Studentsalwayscompletedastudyguideorworksheetintheexplanationphaseofthelesson.Studentpracticewasthenextmostfrequentactivity,andthisactivityalmostalwaysentailedworksheetorstudyguideactivities,inwhichstudentswroteanswerstobriefquestions,workingindividuallyattheirseats.Inthethirdlesson,theteacherassessedstudents’understandingofvocabularyina16-minutewritingactivity,whichwasthencorrectedasawholeclass.Informationwaspresentedinthreetofourdifferentforms;mostoftenteachertalk,text,andworksheetsorstudyguides.Inonelessontherewasabriefsegmentofpeercollaboration,inanother,studentwatchedavideo.Lessonsinvolvedthreeorfourstudentresponseoptions,whichincludedlisteningandansweringquestions,reading,briefwriting,and(inonecaseeach),collaboratingorwatchingavideo.Inthefirsttwolessons,therewerethreedistinctteacheractions:providingtaskdirections,lecturingandleadingawholeclassdiscussion,andmonitoringstudentseatwork.Inthelastlesson,theteacheraddedareviewandanassessmentactivity.Teacher2.Teacher2’sclasswasasolotaughtscienceclasswith18students,onewithanidentifieddisabilityandonewhomtheteacherconsideredatriskforbehavioraldisabilities.Across3observations,Teacher2’slessonsincludedbetween4and5activitysegments.Thelessonopenerwasusuallybrief,exceeding5minutesonlyinLesson3.Intheseopeningactivities,studentsrespondedtotwoorthreequestionspostedonthewhiteboard.Explanationoccupiednearlyhalfofthelessontime--between16(Lesson2)and22(Lesson3)minutes.Theexplanationphasewasalmostalwayscharacterizedbyteacherlectureinterspersedwithsomequestioningandfollow-upexplanations.TheexplanationsegmentinLesson3wasdistinctivebecausethestudentsweregivenmaterialstoexamineandobserveastheteacherexplainedthem.Inthesecondlessonstudentscompletedastructuredlab,workingwithphysicalobjectstocompleteastudyguide.Inthethirdlessontheycompletedbothastudyguideandagraphicorganizer.Alllessonsincludedanassessmentsegment.

Theteacherpresentedinformationin5or6differentmodesacrossthethreelessons.Althoughteachertalk,text,andworksheetsandgraphicorganizersweremostcommon,onelessonincludedcollaboration,twoincludedsimulationactivities,twoinvolvedexaminationormanipulationsofobjects,andthelastlessonusedagraphicorganizer.Fivedifferentteacheractionswereobservedineachlesson.Theteacheralwayspresentedexplicittaskdirections,lecturedandaskedoransweredquestions.Lecturesinthisclasstendedtoinvolvelessdiscussionandquestioningthaninsomeotherclasses.Inthefirsttwolessons,theteachermonitoredstudentseatwork.Inthethirds/hefocusedmoreoncorrectingandgradingpreviouslycompletedstudentwork.Theteacherincludedaspecificreviewactivityinlessonone,andincludedvocabularyinstructioninLessons2and3.Teacher3.Teacher3’sclasswasasolotaughtscienceclasswith32students,onewithanidentifieddisabilityandtwowhomtheteacherconsideredatriskforbehavioraldisabilities.ThereaderisremindedthatdataprovidedforLesson3arebasedonateacherlogandinterview,ratherthanonactualobservationTeacher3’sfirstlessonincluded8activitysegments,with5segmentsinLesson2and3.Theteachertypicallybeganwithabriefwrittenactivityasalessonopener.Alllessonsincludedexplanationandtwoincludedanextendedpracticeactivitywithastudyguide.Eachlessonincludedatleastoneexploratoryactivity,whichtypicallyalternatedwithexplanation.Lesson1,inparticular,involvedmultipleopportunitiesforexplorationasstudentsengagedinseveraldifferentscienceexperiments.Alllessonsincludedadistinctclosingactivity,inwhichtheteacherreviewedordiscussedwhatwouldoccurinsubsequentlessons.Lessonpacewasnotablybrisk,withdistincttransitionsinwhichstudentsstoodwhenfinishedorengagedinsomeotherphysicalactionthatsignaledreadinesstomovetothenextactivity.Informationwaspresentedin5to8differentmodes.Teachertalkandworksheets/studyguideswereimportantsourcesofinformation,buttendedtobebriefactivitiesandwereoftendonewithpeersinpairsortablegroups.Studentsalsoengagedinsimulationsinallthreelessonsandworkedwithphysicalobjectsintwolessons.Lessons1and3includedworkataninteractivewhiteboard,graphicorganizers,video,andimages.Thefirsttwolessonsentailed7differentteacheractions,whichdecreasedto5inthefinallesson.Teacher3alwaysdiscussedlessongoalstowardthebeginningofthelesson,providedspecifictaskdirectionsandmodeledspecificproceduresorwaystocompleteactivities.He/shewasanactivemonitorofstudentseatwork,movingaroundtheroomtoaskandanswerquestionsandclarifyanyconfusionormisunderstanding.Teacher4.Teacher4’sclasswasaself-containedspecialeducationclassroomwith5studentswhoneededsubstantialacademicsupport.Studentshadacombinationoflearningandbehavioraldifficulties.Teacher4joinedthestudyinDecember,andthusherclassroomwasobservedtwice.

Acrossthetwoobservations,Teacher4’slessonsfollowedthesamepattern:5activitysegmentsconformingtoalessonopenerfollowedbyteacherexplanation,practice,assessment,andaformallessonclosing.Studentswatchedavideo(CNNStudentNews)atthestartofbothlessons,andcompletedactivitiesataninteractivewhiteboardatitsconclusion.Teachertalkintheselessonsalwaysentailedguidingthestudentsthroughanactivitywhichincludedcompletionofstudyguides,worksheets,orreadingandcomprehendingtext.Studentswerefreetoaskquestionsduringtheseactivities,butdidsoinfrequently.TheprimarymannerinwhichstudentsaskedandansweredquestionwasthroughaniPadbasedpracticeactivity,whichoccurredinbothclasses.UsingSocrative(areal-timequestioningapp),studentsansweredmultiple-choicequestions,whichtheteacherdisplayedonthewhiteboard,accompaniedbyfollowupexplanationstoclarifyandextendstudents’responses.Theteacherusedbetween5and6differentoptionstopresentinformation,whichincludedteachertalk,worksheetsandstudyguides,textbooks,video,aninteractivewhiteboard,iPads,images,andpeers.Studentsrespondedin5to6differentways,drawingaresponseinthefinallesson,whichwasanactivitynotpreviouslyobserved.Fiveto8differentteacheractionswereobserved.Eachlessonincludedexplicittaskdirections,lecture/discussion(intheformdiscussedabove),andassessment.Thesecondlessonwasdistinctivebecausetheteacherledanextendedexplanationandpracticeactivityinwhichshe/hetaughtandmodeledatextcomprehensionstrategy.Teacher5.Teacher5’sclasswasaco-taughtsocialstudiesclassroomwith35students,13withidentifieddisabilitiesand4consideredtobeatriskbytheteacher.Theco-teachermonitoredandassistedstudentsthroughoutthelessons,givingmoreattentiontostudentswithdisabilities,butalsohelpingotherstudents.Whenquestioned,theco-teacherstatedthatshe/heworkedcloselywiththeteacherinplanninglessons,andsometimestookresponsibilityforinstruction.Onlytwoobservationswereconductedinthisclass,duetoteacherillnessonthedayofthescheduledthirdobservation.Itmaybesignificanttonote,then,thatthesecondobservationoccurredduringthemid-pointoftheE3TPDanddoesnotportrayteacherpracticeattheconclusionoftheyear.Acrossbothobservations,Teacher5’slessonscontained4to6activitysegments.Eachlessonbeganwithalessonopener,whichwasa10-minuteCNNstudentnewsvideo.Ineachlesson,studentshadasetofguidednotestocompleteduringthevideo.Afterthevideo,studentsengagedinaninteractivewhiteboardactivityinwhichvolunteershighlightedlocationsshowninthevideo.Explanationandpracticewerethetwoprimaryactivitiesinbothlessons.Bothincludedanassessmentactivity,inwhichstudentsenteredresponsesintoanonlinequizintheSocrativeapp.StudentsusediPadsorpersonaldevicesforthisactivity,andresponseswerediscussedbytheteacherastheyweredisplayed.Theteachersusedmultiplechoiceandbriefessayquestions,aswellasaquestioninwhichstudentscouldillustratetheirresponse.

Between6to8differentmodesforinformationpresentationandbetween6to7differentstudentresponseoptionswereobservedinthesetwolessons.Inbothlessons,informationwaspresentedthroughteachertalk,text,worksheets/studyguides,video,interactivewhiteboards,andpeers.Thisisoneofonlytwoclassesinwhichstudentswereobservedtoreadatextbook;anactivitythatbeganwiththeteacherreadingaloud,andthenstudentvolunteersreadingbriefsections.Eachlessonincludedstudentcollaborationtoeitherdiscusstextortocompleteanactivity.SevendistinctteacheractionswereobservedinLesson1and5inLesson2.Theteachertaughtatextcomprehensionstrategyinthe2ndlesson.Teacher6.Teacher6’sclasswasaco-taughtsocialstudiesclasswith34students,12ofwhomhadidentifieddisabilities.Theco-teachermonitoredandassistedstudentsthroughoutthelessons,givingmoreattentiontostudentswithdisabilities,butalsohelpingotherstudents.Eachlessoninvolved5differentactivitysegments;openingwiththeCNNvideo,alternatingexplanationandpracticesegments,andconcludingwithassessmentandaspecificclosingactivity.Thelecture/discussionsegmentsweredividedaboutequallybetweenteachertalkandquestionasking/answering.Theteacherusedquestionstocheckunderstandingandclarifyandextendedstudents’responses.She/healsointerspersedlecture/discussionwithpeerengagement;forexample,directingstudentsto“turntoyourneighboranddiscussinshortone-ortwo-minutebursts.Theteachermovedtheclassalongatabriskpace,andnosegmentwasmorethan17minutesinlength.SimilartoTeacher5,she/hekeptstudentsphysicallyactivewhereappropriate,havingthemgetupandfindapartnerforbriefcollaborationorstandupaftercompletinganactivity.She/heusedthesephysicalandothersignalstomarktransitionsfromactivitytoactivity.Theteacherused6or7differentmodesofpresentation,whichincludedteachertalk,text,worksheets/studyguides,video,andpeersineachofthethreelessons.StudentsusedaniPadorpersonaldigitaldevicetocompleteactivitiesinLessons2and3.InLesson2,theyviewedapresentationinNearpodandtookaquizinSocrative.Lesson3includedaSocrativequizaswell.Teacher6,inthefinallesson,hadstudentsconsulttheirtextbookstocompleteabriefactivity.Informationinstudents’worksheetsorstudyguideswasalwaysdisplayedatthefrontoftheroomonawhiteboard,towhichtheteacherreferredduringexplanations.Eachlessonincluded7distinctteacheractions.Theteacheralwaysgaveexplicittaskinstructionsatmultiplepointsduringthelesson.S/heusedtheinteractivelecture/discussionstylediscussedaboveineachlesson,andoftenusedexamplesthatwererelevanttostudents’interestsandlives.S/healwaysdiscussedlessonandbroaderlearninggoals,reviewedinformation,andassessedstudentunderstanding.S/heincludedvocabularyactivitiesinthefirsttwolessonsandtaughtastrategyfortextcomprehensioninthethirdlesson.MostdistinctiveaboutTeacher6’slessonswasthenumberofdifferentinformationpresentationandstudentresponseoptionswithinanactivitysegment.Thecodingsystem

usedinthisstudydoesn’tcapturetheswitchesbetweeninformationpresentationorstudentresponseoptionswithinthesameportionofalesson.Asmentionedabove,withinthesamesegment,studentsmightmovefromreadingtodiscussingwithpeerstoviewingavideobacktolisteningtotheteacher.StudentTimeonTask,LessonRatings,andContentLearningTableOneshowsstudenttimeontask;students’ratingsoflessoninterestandenjoyment,lessondifficulty,andtheireffortandattention;andscoresforstudentcontentlearning.FigureFourprovidesagraphicaldisplayoftheseresults,presentingscoresforallteachersinthesamedisplay.StudentTimeonTask.Recallthatontaskdatawerecollectedfor6studentsattwo-minuteintervals.Thesedatawerecollectedonlyafterthelessonhadformallybegunandwerenotcollectedbeyondthepointinwhichthefinalactivityconcluded(eveniftherewasmoretimeleftintheclass).AggregatedtimeontaskdataaredisplayedinFigureFour;timeontaskdataaredisaggregatedforspecialendgeneraleducationstudentsinTableOne.InTeacher1’sandTeacher2’sclasses,therewerelargerdifferencesindataforstudentswithandwithoutdisabilities,althoughthedatadidnotalwaysshowthatgeneraleducationstudentswheremorelikelytobeontask.Fortheremainderoftheteachers,timeontaskratesforstudentswithandwithoutdisabilitieswerehighlysimilar.Timeontaskratesrangedfrom73%to100%.Inalmostalllessons,studentswereobservedtobeontaskmorethan80%ofthetime.Notsurprisingly,whenateacherwasnotdirectlyengagedwithstudents,aswasthecaseintwoclassesastheteachersorganizedinformationandmaterialswhilestudentsworkedattheirseats,ontaskbehaviordecreased.Timeontaskratesappearedtobehigherinclasseswheretherewasmorevarietyininformationpresentation,studentresponseoptions,andteacheractions.StudentLessonRatings:RecallthatstudentratingswerecollectedinLessons2and3,andthereforetherearenolessonratingdataforLesson1.Ratingswerealmostalwaysthemostfavorableintheself-containedspecialeducationclassroom,but,otherwise,weresimilaracrossteachersandlessons.Studentratingsoflessoninterestandenjoymentaveragedaround2outof3,andtendedtobehigherinclasseswithmorelessonvariety.Ratingsoflessondifficultyaveragedaround1.5outof3,anddidnotappeartovaryinanysystematicmanneralignedwithlessoncharacteristics.Students’ratingsoftheefforttheyputintoalessonhoveredaround2.5outof3,andshowedlittlesystematicvariability.Students’ratingsoftheirattentionwerealsohighandconsistentacrossteachersandlessons,averagingaround2.5.Studentcontentlearningscorestendedtobehigherinclasseswithmorevarietyinpresentation,response,andteacheraction,butdifferenceswerenotsignificant.

DiscussionandConclusions

ThispilotstudywasconductedtoprovideinsightintotheimpactoftheE3Tprogramonteachers’knowledgeaboutanduseofUDL-alignedinstructionalprinciples.ItsprimarypurposewastoprovideinformationtotheE3TstaffabouttheimpactoftheirPDprogram.ItwasalsodesignedtoinformthesecondyearofE3Timplementationwithinthisparticularcohortofteachers.ThestudyalsoservedtooffersomeinsightintoresearchmethodsthatcouldanswerquestionsabouttheimpactofPDandtheimplementationofUDL,whichhaveprovedtobe“wickedproblems”forteachereducatorsandresearchersoverthedecades(e.g.,Borko,Whitcomb,&Liston,2009,https://cset.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/files/documents/publications/borko-wickedproblemsonissuesoftechnologyandteaching.pdf).Finally,thestudyofferedadditionalopportunitiesfor6oftheE3Tparticipantstoexamineandreflectupontheirpracticeindetail.Overall,theresultsfromthisstudyshowthatsomepotentiallyimportantchangesoccurredamongteachers.TheirbeliefsaboutUDL-alignedpractices,andtheirratingsoftheircompetencetoimplementthem,underwentshifts.Boththeseself-assessmentsstartedhigh,perhapshigherthanexpected.Highlypositivebeliefsaboutcommonteachingdilemmas(e.g.,placementingeneralversusspecialeducation)andhighratingsofcompetenceinmeetingperennialclassroomchallenges(suchasmanagingchallengingbehaviororengagingallstudents)areinconsistentwithotherstudiesaboutteacherbeliefsandcompetence.Interestingly,someoftheseitemsdecreasedoverthecourseofthestudy.AlthoughonemightconcludethatE3Tdidnothavethedesiredimpactonbeliefsandself-ratedcompetence,webelieveotherwise.AplausiblealternativeinterpretationisthatE3Thelpedteachersbecomemorerealisticabouttheveryrealchallengestheyfaceinmeetingtheneedsofalllearners,andtheskillsthattheyneedtodeveloptodoso.Increasingawarenessisacriticalsteptowardchangingbehavior,andperhapstheratingscaleshiftsshowthatthisprocessisunderway.Anothersetoffindingsrelatestolessonplanning.Ontheonehand,teachersappreciatedthestructuredlesson-planningtemplateofferedintheE3Tprogram.Inface-to-facesessions,theydemonstratedthattheycoulduseiteffectively.But,whentheresearcherobservedteachers’classes,2ofthe6teachersdidnotwritealessonplanofanysort.Whenaskedwhy,theystatedthattheyplanned“inthehead”priortoeachlesson.Eventhefourteacherswhowrotelessonplansdoubtedthattheycouldwritesuchdetailedplansforeverylesson.Indeed,twooftheteacherswhoplannedwrotetheirfinalplansattheunitlevel,articulatingthebigideas,learningobjectives,etc.,atthelevelofaweeklongunitofinstruction.Allteachersbelievedtheprocesswasmoreappropriateatthelevelofaunit.Thisfindingraisestheissueoftheperceivedfeasibilityandvalueoflesson-by-lessonplanning.Teachersvaluedplanningwithcolleaguestohelpsharetheworkandideas.However,evenwithPLCsessionsavailabletothemonaregularbasis,teachersfoundplanningtimecompromisedbyotherschoolactivitiesthathadbecomethemostrecentinashiftingsetofpriorities.

ObservationsandinterviewswiththesixcasestudyteachersprovidedevidencethatknowledgeofUDL-alignedpracticeshadincreased,andteacherswereincreasinglyabletorecognizehowthesewereincorporatedintotheirownpractice.However,classroomobservationsdidnotshowdramaticincreasesinUDL-alignedpracticesamongthesesixteachers.Overall,amongmostteachers,therewasashifttoasomewhatlargervarietyofrepresentationsthatnowencompassedvideo,images,andgraphicorganizers.Andsometeachersbegantoincludevocabularyandstrategyinstructioninlaterlessons.TheseareimportantinstructionalpracticestaughtwithintheE3Tframework.Theuseandmeansofassessmentalsoevolvedinthreeclasses,withteachersincorporatingSocrative,theonline,real-timequizzingapp,intolessons.Theabilitytodisplaystudentresponsestothewholeclass,whilemaintainingstudentanonymity,providedteacherswithaquickmeanstoassessstudentunderstandingandledtomoreexpansivediscussions.Thus,inthisinstance,onecouldenvisionhowgreateruseoftechnologyinclassroomscouldleadtomoreUDL-alignedinstructionalpractices.However,onlyhalftheteacherswereobservedtousedigitaldevicesintheclassroom,althoughallhadapproximatelyequalaccesstoiPads.Furthermore,allteachershadaninteractivewhiteboard,buttwouseditprimarilytodisplaystaticinformation,asonemightdowithanoverheadorElmoprojector.TheincorporationofiPadsandpersonaldigitaldevicesintotheselessonsdidtaketimeawayfrominstruction.BecausetherewerenotasufficientnumberofiPadsforeachstudentinlargerclasses,studentshadtosharedigitaldevices.Manystudentsusedtheirpersonalsmartphones.Ittooktimeforstudentstoformgroupssuitableforsharing,toaccesstheschool’swireless,andtologintothevirtual“room”inwhichtheactivitytookplace.Yet,theteacherswhouseddeviceswerehighlyorganizedand,withoneexception(duetodifficultiesaccessingtheschool’swirelessnetwork)studentsspentnomorethan5minutesgettingreadytoparticipateinadigitalactivity.Assessment,LessonOpeners,Explanation,StudentPractice,andExplorationwereprimarytopicsintheyear’sE3TPD,withportionsofsessionsdevotedtocreatingandimplementingmorediverseandengagingoptionsforeachoftheselessonsegments.Forallteachers,theLessonOpenerremainedawrittenactivityand,forsome,theamountoftimedevotedtoitwasquitelengthy.TheExplanationsegmentofthelessonsremainedquitetraditionalforoneteacher,howeverdidincorporatemorevariedmeansofpresentationandactionsformost.Explorationwasobservedonlyinthescienceclasses.Thisisperhapsnotsurprising,giventhatexperimentationisviewedasanimportantactivityinscienceinstruction.E3TPDencouragedteacherstobeginatleastsomelessonswithexploration,inordertopiquestudents’interestandtoprovideafoundationontowhichto“hook”explanationandpractice.However,teacherswhousedexplorationalmostalwaysprecededitwithanexplanationofthephenomenatobeexplored.Studentpracticeoptionsalsoremainedrathertraditional,rootedinwrittenandtext-basedactivities.TherewereseveralpracticesthatmightbeconsideredwellalignedwiththeUDLframeworkthatwereneverobserved.Forexample,writingactivitieswerealwaysbrief,inthesensethattheyfocusedonfillingintheblanks,writingbriefnotesabouttopics,orcreatingshort

essays.Noextended,ormoreauthentic,writingactivitieswereobserved.Althoughteachersreportedthattheirdistrictallowedthemfreedominregardtoinstructionalmaterials,andtextbookusewasrare,paper-basedprintedmaterialsremainedacommonsourceofinformationpresentation.E3TPDsessionsprovidedteacherswithinformationandpracticewithsupportedtext,butnostudentwasobservedtousedigitallysupportedtextduringtheseobservations.Rather,theseteacherssupportedstudents’workwithtextthroughdiscussions,studyguides,and,inafewinstances,supportednotes,graphicorganizers,peerreadinganddiscussions.Inthreecases,teacherstaughtanexplicittextcomprehensionstrategy.Thus,itcannotbesaidthatteachersdidnotsupportstudentsastheyreadprint,butdigitaloptionswerenotusedtofacilitatetheprovisionofsupportoralternatives.Studentchoicewasobservedonlyonce,aswasadigitalalternativetotext.Inthisinstance,theformoftextdisplayedonstudents’deviceswasastatictext-basedpresentation.E3TPDdevotedtimetotechnologyandappsasmeansoffacilitatingUDL-alignedpracticessuchasincreasedengagementandalternativestotraditionalreadingandwritingactivities.Theissueswithlimitedtechnology,aswellastheorganizationalissuesinvolvedintheuseofiPadsandpersonaldevices,undoubtedlyconstrainedteachers’useoftechnology,orevendesiretodoso.Infact,thepre-andpost-testteacherbeliefquestionsshowedadecreaseinteachers’beliefsthattheyhadadequatetechnologyintheirclassrooms,perhapsbecauseE3Tmadeteachersawareofthemanyoptionstechnologyprovides,creatingdissatisfactionwiththeirlimitedmeansforimplementingthese.Anotherrathersalientobservation,notquitecapturedinthedatareportedabove,wasthevariabilityinteachers’classroommanagementandorganizationalpractices.Asthetimeontaskdatasuggest,studentsweremorelikelytobeattentiveinsomeclassesthanothers,andthesewereclassesinwhichtherewasmorevariety.Theclasseswhichusedmorevariedpracticeswerealsotheonesinwhichteacherswerebetterorganized.Asdiscussedabove,toefficientlyincorporatedigitalassessment,teachershadtobewellorganizedinsettinguptheactivity.Inexploratoryactivities,itwasimportanttohavematerialspreparedinadvance.Inonelessonwheretheteacherhadtospendasignificantamountofinstructionaltimepreparinglabmaterials,studentsbecomeinattentiveanddisruptive.Inanotherlesson,inwhichtheteacherhadpreparedallthelabmaterialsandneededtimeonlytoretrieveandhandthemout,studentsremainedquietandfocusedonthetaskathand.Similarly,theuseofsomebasicinstructionalpractices,includingfrequentquestioning,cleartransitionsbetweenactivities,routinesforpassingoutandhandinginmaterials,explicittaskdirections,andstudentmonitoring,seemedtoformanimportantfoundationuponwhichtobuildmorevaried,UDL-alignedpractices.Theseconclusions,althoughanecdotal,suggestthatperhapsthereisthresholdofclassroomorganization,behaviormanagement,andeffectiveteachingpracticesthatneedstobeinplacebeforeateachercaneffectivelyaddmoreUDL-alignedpracticestohisorherrepertoire.Despitesomeofthevariationsincasestudyteachersandlessonsdiscussedabove,studentratingsoftheirownattention,interest,enjoyment,effort,andperceivedlessondifficultywerehighlysimilar.Thesedimensionsofthelessonwereexplored,fromthestudents’perspective,becausetheyareconsideredimportantstudentoutcomesofUDL.Theconsistencyamongstudents,withattention,enjoyment,interestalmostalwaysratedas

moderate,effortashigh,anddifficultyaslow,weresomewhatsurprising.Itwasexpectedthat,inclasseswithfewerUDL-alignedpractices,ratingsforattention,enjoyment,interest,andeffortwouldbehigher,andperhapsperceiveddifficultywouldbelower.Furthermore,thereappearedtobeonlyamodestandinconsistentrelationshipbetweenUDL-alignedpracticesandstudentlearning.Perhapsthestudentratingmeasurewashighlyinsensitive,asthereappearedtobeapalpabledifferenceamongtheclassesinthelevelofinterestandengagement.Evenwhenstudentswereratedason-taskinsomeclassrooms,theiron-taskbehaviorseemedtobemoreafunctionof“playingschool”thanofsincereinterest,enjoyment,engagementoreffort.Alternatively,perhapsstudentsarenotgoodjudgesoftheirownthoughtsandbehaviorsrelatedtoinstruction.StudentexecutivefunctioningisanimportantcomponentofseveralUDLprinciples.ThelackofdifferentiationamongstudentratingsmightsuggestthatexecutivefunctioningcouldbefurtheraddressedinE3Ttraining.ItisimportanttonotethatthepresentationofresultsfromteacherobservationsdoesnotentailjudgmentabouttheappropriatenessoreffectivenessofUDL-alignedpractices.AlmosteveryobservedlessoncontainedanexampleofteachingthatcouldberecognizedasalignedwithaUDLprinciple.Forexample,oneteachermadeextensiveuseofcollaboration—apracticealignedwiththeprincipleofengagement.Anotherteacherrarelyusedstudentcollaboration.However,withinalonglecturesequence,thatteacherwouldtailorhisorherquestionsandexplanationstoexperiencesthatwererelevanttothestudents’lives.RelevanceisalsoapracticealignedwiththeUDLprincipleofengagement.Onemightquestionthedesirabilityoreffectivenessofanextendedlecture,particularlywhencomparedtoopportunitiesforstudentstocollaborateormorevarietyinthemannerinwhichinformationispresented,yettherewereelementsofthelecturethatwereconsistentwithUDL.ThecontentbeingtaughtseemedtoimpactUDLpracticesaswell;asdemonstratedbythefrequencywithwhichExplorationwasimplementedinscience,relativetosocialstudieslessons.Inthisstudy,teachers’practiceswerequiteconsistentovertime.Teacherswithlessvariedlessonsatthestartofthestudyhadlessvariedlessonsattheendofthestudy,relativetoothers.Similarly,teacherswhoselessonshadmorevarietyatthestartofthestudyhadthehighestlevelsofvarietyattheendofthestudy.Yet,therewasevidenceofuptakeofpracticestaughtinE3T,overtime,innearlyallthelessonsobserved.However,thespecificpracticesthatteacherschosetouseseemedtobuildupontheonestheyalreadyhadinplace.RatherthancriticizeteacherswhoseemedtousefewerUDL-alignedpractices,theobservationaldatashowthatallteachershadsomeinstructionalstrengths.ThisfindingraisesthequestionofthedeliveryofPD,atleastasrelatedtoUDL.Doesdeliveryofthesameinformationandexperiences,toacohortasawhole,constituteaneffectivePDpractice?AnalternativemightbetodesignanddeliverPDthatismoreresponsivetothecurrentstrengthsofteachers,expandinguponthosetobroadentheteacher’srepertoireofUDL-alignedpractices.Forexample,ateacherwhoisskilledatdrawinguponstudents’experienceand,thus,addingrelevancetoexplanations,mightfocusondevelopingmorevarietyininstructionalpresentationsduringhisorherexplanations.Incontrast,ateacherwhoalreadyusesavarietyofUDLalignedpracticesmightbechallengedtoincorporatepracticessuchasimprovedexecutivefunctioning.Theprofilesofthesetwo

teachersareexamplesofthedifferentknowledgeandskillsthatteachersbringtoPD,andsuggestthatPDbebettertailoredtoteachers’currentlevelsofpractice.Furthermore,theresultsofthisstudypointoutthatmeasurementofUDLimplementationisfraughtwithdifficulty.First,asdiscussedabove,therearepracticeswithinpractices.Popularmeasurementapproaches,suchasUDLLookForsorUDLchecklists,examineUDLatasuperficiallevelbynotingonlythepresenceorabsence,orthesubjectivedegree,towhichpredeterminedpracticesareimplemented.DeterminingwhatconstitutesaUDLpracticeisalsohighlysubjective.Statingthatactivitiessuchasusingdigitaltext,peercollaboration,orvideo,inandofthemselves,constituteUDL,isshortsighted.Useofdigitaltexttodisplayinformationinananalogousmannertoprintedtextseemstoofferfewadditionalbenefits.Peercollaborationthatonlyprovidesanopportunitytobecomelessengagedinataskwhiletheteacherorganizesmaterialsisunlikelytobenefitstudents’learning.Andavideothathaslittletodowiththecontentofthelessonmaybeengaging,buthasquestionablevalueinthecontextofwhatstudentsareexpectedtounderstandaboutatopic.ThefieldneedstotakeaseriouslookathowUDL-alignedpracticesaredefined,howUDLimplementationismeasured,andhowjudgmentsaremadeaboutUDLpractices.Toclaimthat,atthispoint,UDLisaresearch-basedpractice,ortopurporttoknowhowtomeasureitsimplementation,doesdisservicetothefield.Therearemanylimitationsinthisstudythattempertheconclusionsthatonecandrawfromit.TheabovediscussionabouttheambiguityinherentinUDLitselfisonemajorissuethathasplaguedthis,andothersimilarstudies.Otherlimitationsincludeasmallsampleofteachersfromwhichmostoftheresultsaredrawn.Thedegreetowhichtheyarerepresentativeofotherteachers,evenwithinthePDcohort,isunknown.Theinstrumentsusedinthisstudyareofunknownreliabilityandvalidity.DesignedtocorrespondtokeyPDoutcomes,theymayhavebeeninsensitivetootherchangesthatoccurredinteacherpracticesandstudentoutcomes.Furthermore,theexclusivefocusononelessonduringeachobservationisproblematic.Teachersdonotplanforonelessonatatime.Theirplanning,asnotedbymanyteachersanddocumentedbysome,takesplace,atleastconceptually,atthelevelofaunit.Thus,instructionmaybebetterconceivedofasalessoncycle,andevaluatingitatthelevelofonelessonmaydistortthewaysinwhichteacherslearnedfromandenactedE3TPDandUDLprinciples.Finally,thisstudyportraysaworkinprogressintheMacombISD,asthedataarefromonlythefirstofatwo-yearPDprogram.

FigureOne

Teachers’BeliefsaboutImplementationofUDL-alignedpracticesIbelievethat….

Graphshowspercentageofteacherswhochoseagreeorstronglyagreeonfive-pointLikertscale

0 20 40 60 80 100

Itisnotpossibleforeveryonetoget"A"

Ihaveadequatetechnologyinmyclassroom

Itispossibletomotivateallstudents

Itisessentialtoofferstudentschoice

Classesaretooheterogeneous

Classsizesaretoolarge

Specialedstudentsshouldspendlesstimeingeneraled

Ihavesufficientadministrativesupporttoteachchallengingstudents

Ihaveadequatetrainingtoteachdiverselearners

post

pre

FigureTwo

Teachers’Self-RatedCompetenceinImplementingUDL-AlignedPracticesIknowhowto….

Graphshowspercentageofteacherswhochoseagreeorstronglyagreeonfive-pointLikertscale

0 20 40 60 80 100

Teachpoorreaders

Managechallengingbehaviors

Engageallstudents

Provideappropriatelevelofchallenge

Gainandkeepattentionofallstudents

Interestallstudentsinlearning

Effectivestudentcollaboration

Findandcreateinstructionalmaterialsappropriateforall

Effectivelyteachdifficultcontent

Monitorandassessfairly

post

pre

FigureThree

TeachingPractices

Teacher1

Teacher2

0 2 4 6 8

Segments

Present

SResponse

TActions

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

0 2 4 6 8

Segments

Present

SResponse

TActions

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

Teacher3

Teacher4

0 2 4 6 8

Segments

Present

SResponse

TActions

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

0 2 4 6 8

Segments

Present

SResponse

TActions

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

Teacher5

Teacher6

0 2 4 6 8

Segments

Present

SResponse

TActions

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

0 2 4 6 8

Segments

Present

SResponse

TActions

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

FigureFour

StudentTimeonTaskandRatingsAcrossTeachers

StudentTimeonTask

StudentRating:LessonInterest

0 20 40 60 80 100

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

Lesson1

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

StudentRating:LessonEnjoyment

StudentRating:LessonDifficulty

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

StudentRating:LessonEffort

StudentRating:Attention

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

StudentContentLearningScore

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Teacher1

Teacher2

Teacher3

Teacher4

Teacher5

Teacher6

Lesson3

Lesson2

E3TTrainingProgram,CohortEight,YearOne

30


31

Table1TeacherObservationalData

Teacher1Science,co-taught,25studentstotal,3specialeducation,4atrisk

ObservationalData StudentRatings(Scale1–3) Segments(min)

PresentationofInformation

StudentResponseOptions

TeacherActions

%Engaged Interest Enjoyment Difficulty Effort Attention LearningScore0-2

Lesson14Opener(9)Explain(8)Practice(16)Explanation(5)

4TTalkTextWS/SGPeers

4Listen/answerReadBriefwriteCollaborate

3DirectLecture/discussMonitor

Sped:91%Gened:77%Overall:80%

X X X X X X

Lesson23Opener(15)Explain(29)Practice(7)

3TTalkTextWS/SG

3Listen/answerReadBriefwrite

3DirectLecture/discussMonitor


1.8 1.5 1.5 2.5 2.4 1.4

Lesson34Explain(3)Practice(22)Assess(16)Explain(12)

4TTalkTextWS/SGVideo

4Listen/answerReadBriefwriteWatch

5DirectLecture/discussReviewMonitorAssess


1.7 1.7 1.4 2.5 2.3 1.4

LessonThreeNote:Beginsafterlongdelayduetoteachers’discussionwithstudentwhohadbehavioralissueinthehallwaybeforeclass.


32

Teacher2,Science,solotaught,18students,1specialeducation,1atrisk

ObservationalData StudentRatings(scale0–3) Segments(minutes)

Presentationofinformation


TeacherActions


Lesson14Opener(10)Explain(22)Practice(4)Assess(6)

5TTalkTextWS/SGComputerSimulation

5Listen/answerReadDrawTypeManipulate

5DirectLecture/discussMonitorReviewAssess

Sped:N/AGened:91%Overall:91%

X X X X X X

Lesson25Opener(5)Practice(13)Assess(12)Explain(16)Practice(9)

6TTalkTextWS/SGSimulationObjectPeer

5Listen/answerReadBriefwriteCollaborateManipulate

5DirectLecture/discussMonitorVocabAssess


1.9 1.8 1 2.5 2.9 1.3

Lesson35Opener(4)Explain(14)Explain(7)Practice(13)Assess(14)

5TTalkTextWS/SGGOObject

4Listen/answerReadBriefwriteManipulate

5DirectLecture/discussModelVocabAssess


1.6 1.5 1.2 2.4 2.4 1.5


33

Lesson1Note:Studentsareinthecomputerlab,specialedstudentisabsent.Lesson2note:Engagementdecreasessignificantlyinlongsegmentsofbriefwritingonworksheet


34

Teacher3,sciencesolotaught,32students,Ispecialed,2atrisk

ObservationalData StudentRatings(Scale0to3) Segments(minutes)

PresentationOfInformation


TeacherActions


Lesson18Opener(7)Explain(4)Explore(4)Explore(3)Practice:(19)Assess(5)Explain(8)Close(5)

7TTalkWS/SGIWBGOSimulationObjectPeers

5Listen/answerReadBriefwriteTypeCollaborate

7DirectLecture/discussMonitorReviewGoalsModelAssess

Sped:100%GenEd:98%Total:92%

X X X X X X

Lesson25Opener(5)Explore(19)Explain(6)Explore(10)Close:(5)

5TtalkWS/SGSimulationObjectPeers

5Listen/answerReadBriefwriteWatchManipulate

7DirectLecture/discussMonitorGoalsReviewModelAssess


2 2 .8 2.3 2.4 1.4

Lesson35OpenerExploreExplainPracticeClose

8TtalkTextWS/SGVideoGOSimulationPeersImages

4Listen/answerReadBriefwriteWatchCollaborate

5DirectLecture/discussMonitorGoalsModel

Notcollected

1.8 1.8 .8 2.5 2.7 1.6


35

Lesson3note:ObservernotpresentduetoM-STEPschedule,teachercouldnotobtainvideorecorder,couldnotdeterminetimedevotedtoeachsegment,engagementdatanotcollected,teacherdiscussedlessonwithresearcher,teacheradministeredstudentrating.


36

Teacher4,Adaptedsocialstudies,5specialeducation

ObservationalData StudentRatings(Scale0to3) Segment(minutes)

Presentation ResponseOptions

TeacherActions


Lesson25Opener(19)Explain(10)Practice(14)Assess(10)Close(2)

6TtalkWS/SGVideoIWBiPadPeers

5Listen/answerReadBriefwriteTypeCollaborate

5DirectLecture/discussReviewAssessMonitor

Sped:96%Overall:96%

2.8 2.6 1 2.6 3 1.4


7TtalkTextWS/SGVideoIWBiPadImages

6Listen/answerReadBriefwriteWatchDrawType

8DirectLecture/discussMonitorReadaloudVocabStrategiesAssessModel

Sped:99%Overall:99%

2.5 2.3 .75 2.8 2.8 1.5

LessonNotes:TeacherjoinedinJanuary2014,thereforenofirstlessonobservation.


37

Teacher5,socialstudiesco-taught,35students,13specialeducation,4atrisk




TeacherActions


Lesson16Opener(15)Explain(20)Explain(13)Practice(7)Close(8)Assess(2)

6TtalkTextWS/SGVideoIWBPeers

6Listen/answerReadBriefwriteWatchTypeCollaborate

7DirectLecture/discussMonitorReadaloudReviewVocabAssess


x X X X X X

Lesson24Opener(10)Explain(20)Practice(14)Assess(3)

8TtalkTextWS/SGVideoIWBiPadPeersImages

7Listen/answerReadIWBWatchDrawTypeCollaborate

5DirectLecture/discussReadaloudStrategiesAssess


2 2 .8 2.5 2.5 1.7

Notes:Teacherwasabsentduring3rdscheduledobservation


38

Teacher6,co-taughtsocialstudies,34students,12specialeducation




TeacherActions


Lesson15Opener(10)Explain(15)Explain(15)Assess(3)Close(5)

7TtalkTextSG/WSVideoIWBGOPeers

5Listen/answerReadBriefwriteWatchCollaborate

7DirectLecture/discussMonitorGoalsReviewVocabularyAssess


x X X X X X


6TtalkTextSG/WSVideoiPadPeers


7DirectLecture/discussGoalsReviewVocabMonitorAssess


2 2 1.6 2.5 2.8 1.5

Lesson35Opener(12)Practice(17)Explain(13)Practice(5)Assess(3)

7TtalkTextWS/SGVideoIWBiPadPeers


8DirectLecture/discussMonitorGoalsReviewStrategiesAssessModel


2 2 1 2.7 2.8 1.8

Study of the E3T Training Program, Cohort Eight, Year One ...

Documents

Transcript of Study of the E3T Training Program, Cohort Eight, Year One ...